about Unstructured Meshes

[li pan]

hi Matt,
have you ever evaluated Tetgen? How do you think about
the quality of the 3D mesh it generated?

see u

pan


--- Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 3/2/07, Jianing Shi <jianings at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Well, let me rephrase my question.  So the mesh
> support in PETSc
> > already includes the functionality of partitioning
> meshes, I guess,
> > using ParMetis, is that the case?  Something that
> an end user need to
> > worry about is really how to generate a mesh that
> is tailored towards
> > his/her application.
> 
> It can use a range of partioners, like Chaco for
> instance.
> 
> > I am trying to write a library on top of PETSc
> meshes that will
> > generate meshes according to some neurophysiology.
>  I would like to
> > know what are the mesh generate softwares out
> there that will
> > interface nicely with PETSc, or if it makes sense
> for me to write my
> > own?  Just would like to understand more about the
> data structure in
> > the PETSc ALE::Mesh classes.  Is there any
> tutorial out there apart
> > from looking at the source code in the mesh
> directory?
> 
> 1) No, it makes no sense for you to write a mesh
> generator
> 
> 2) In 2D, Triangle. In 3d, the only free things are
> TetGen and Netgen. I support
>     TetGen. Hopefully, CMU will release its MG soon.
> 
> There is a tutorial on the website.
> 
> > I am currently using the petsc-2.3.2-p3.  Is there
> any new
> > functionality about meshes in the development
> version?
> 
> All the working stuff is in petsc-dev.
> 
>   Matt
> 
> > Jianing
> -- 
> One trouble is that despite this system, anyone who
> reads journals widely
> and critically is forced to realize that there are
> scarcely any bars to eventual
> publication. There seems to be no study too
> fragmented, no hypothesis too
> trivial, no literature citation too biased or too
> egotistical, no design too
> warped, no methodology too bungled, no presentation
> of results too
> inaccurate, too obscure, and too contradictory, no
> analysis too self-serving,
> no argument too circular, no conclusions too
> trifling or too unjustified, and
> no grammar and syntax too offensive for a paper to
> end up in print. --
> Drummond Rennie
> 
> 



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com